Ford Ecoboost 3-cyl Summer 2013

[LeanBurn]

Originally Posted by ecomodded

My 1992 geo convertible came with 50 hp.
This lil beast comes with 123hp.
60hp would of sufficed, if it was a true economy car.
I know people add 100hp to their 3 cylinders but it is not at all needed.
Oil companies must be up in arms over all these high rpm low mpg vehicles that are hitting the pumps.
Ass backwards engineering if i do say so my self.. I was hoping for a gas miser out of this revamped 3 banger. Bummer

its specs below


Engine:
Turbo 1.0L I3
Power:
123 HP / 125 LB-FT
Transmission:
6-Speed Manual
0-60 Time:
11 Seconds (est.)
Drivetrain:
Front-Wheel Drive
Curb Weight:
2,800 LBS

We had a 1987 Chevy Sprint 1.0L 3cyl (Suzuki re-brand I believe) it would regularly get 53mpgUS or 4.4L/100km with no hypermiling at all other than 55mph (90km/hr) cruising speed, mostly because my dad felt 3000 rpm was as much as he wanted to go and that was the speed. It had 48hp/57tq. Of course it only weighed 1500lbs which is unheard of today.

2800lbs on this Fiesta 3cyl subcompact is the same as my 2009 Corolla compact, actually a little heavier. You would think it would be in the range of the Yaris 2200lbs, or the Fit at 2500lbs, or Versa Note at 2500lbs...just seems heavy in comparison to all the other cars in its segment. If they trimmed the fat, it would yield better mpgs.

[roosterk0031]

According to the link back a page curb weight 2537 hatchback m/t, 2578 sedan, the ST is 2742, so base models not quite that porky.

[serialk11r]

214 pounds? That's not light...That's barely lighter than a 1.8L Corolla motor. The cast iron is probably to save money not weight or space.

[gone-ot]

Originally Posted by serialk11r

214 pounds? That's not light...That's barely lighter than a 1.8L Corolla motor. The cast iron is probably to save money not weight or space.

It's cast iron probably to keep the turbocharged block from "blowing-up" when the engine is forced (pun intended) to produce maximum horsepower. Aluminum blocks maybe much lighter but they're also much weaker too.

...here is a link to R&T magazine article: http://www.roadandtrack.com/go/news/...gine-announced

[Jasen]

I'm not buying into most of these so called FE rigs their putting out these day's, they come up way short in my book. I drove an 85 Toyota 2wd efi p/u for 10 years. It was pretty zippy and I drove it like it was a Supra. At 200k it was still avg. 28 mpg mixed driving.
It seems that most of the new so called FE car's are just plain ugly, mainly do to fact "they" ignore the golden rule[/I] of proportional design, which turn's me off as well as, I'm sure, a lot of people on the FE fence.
It's not that hard to design a decent looking small car and put a real FE engine in it. Shoot the Metro wasn't that bad looking and a site better then most of what's offered now.
In my mind, with the technological advances, today's gas guzzler's should be full size p/u's and van's that only get's 40mpg EPA.
They say America want's big powerful car's, I don't think the majority of us do. Enough room, good looks and a bit more power then we typically need, not a 300-400hp modern version of a station wagon.

sorry, I might have went on a bit of a rant

[user removed]

Cast iron absorbs heat at a much lower rate than aluminum, plus the exhaust manifold is integral with the head, haven't seen many aluminum exhaust manifolds. Iron blocks and heads have better combined expansion characteristics, read lower stresses on gaskets. Also no exhaust manifold gasket. Head gasket failures should be non existent.

regards
Mech

[cRiPpLe_rOoStEr]

It was once quoted to be made out of cast-iron to have a more accurate temperature control and get the catalyst to operate at its optimum point quicker from the start-up.

[serialk11r]

Originally Posted by Old Tele man

It's cast iron probably to keep the turbocharged block from "blowing-up" when the engine is forced (pun intended) to produce maximum horsepower. Aluminum blocks maybe much lighter but they're also much weaker too.

...here is a link to R&T magazine article: http://www.roadandtrack.com/go/news/...gine-announced

If they wanted to strengthen the block they could've used steel liners, cast iron liners, or composite reinforced liners. Aluminum block Subarus do just fine, MMC liner 2ZZ-GEs and K20s hold massive amounts of boost. It's cost, not strength. Cast iron block is cheap and strong, but worse.

[Frank Lee]

Nothing wrong with good ol' cast iron; many of my favorite engines are made of it.

[serialk11r]

Originally Posted by Frank Lee

Nothing wrong with good ol' cast iron; many of my favorite engines are made of it.

Nothing wrong, just not as good as aluminum :P

Seriously though, iron block S54 3.2L weighs more than the 4L S65 V8 (which also revs harder). Iron block Mazda B6 1.6L weighs more than a 2.5L 2AR-FE. Aluminum with composite liner or steel liner is the way to go if you want good performance.